Opinions on "Antifa"?

I'm seeing this all over the place from Nazi sympathizers "But but the Antifa are mean too!" Or "It was the Antifa's fault!!"

Your thoughts on the Antifa?
Is this CNN article an accurate description?

What is Antifa?

Antifa is short for anti-fascists. The term is used to define a broad group of people whose political beliefs lean toward the left -- often the far left -- but do not conform with the Democratic Party platform. The group doesn't have an official leader or headquarters, although groups in certain states hold regular meetings.

Antifa positions can be hard to define, but many members support oppressed populations and protest the amassing of wealth by corporations and elites. Some employ radical or militant tactics to get their message across.

While it can be difficult to distinguish Antifa activists from other protesters, some dress head to toe in black. Members call this the "Black Bloc."

But Crow said the philosophy of Antifa is based on the idea of direct action. "The idea in Antifa is that we go where they (right-wingers) go. That hate speech is not free speech. That if you are endangering people with what you say and the actions that are behind them, then you do not have the right to do that.

"And so we go to cause conflict, to shut them down where they are, because we don't believe that Nazis or fascists of any stripe should have a mouthpiece."

2. lots to read about it here as well - not saying it is accurate, but it is info.

3. I am Antifa.

Do we need violence? Absolutely not, but the "alt right"/far right and three percenters are at war with us, with the 'other', and with Democracy. And yes, we need to destroy, destroy, the tropes and cliches which fuel the right wing, discredit their leaders, defund their organizations, and defend all the people they wish to wage their war on.

It's time to fight back. Violence and revolution is not necessary, but someone and something is going to destroyed at the end of this, and I'm not going to let it be the people I love or the ideas I have and share with others, not without a fight.

55. the path to progress

lies with nonviolence, with education, with mass demonstrations that are consistently peaceful. "Fighting back" is accomplished best with no actual fighting.
Proof of this position can be found in many ways, in the demise of , or near demise, of Occupy, a movement that was destroyed as it gained momentum, in large part by the Black Bloc destruction of property which ensured the public turning against Occupy in the mistaken belief that those violent anarchists were a part of that movement.
Not only do we "not need violence" we must also understand that violence harms our movement and makes achieving our goals much more difficult if not impossible.

187. VERY well said . Thank you for

stating the position we must maintain regarding protests. Without the violence and destruction these few commit the Nazis and fascists in the media and republican party could not use both sides are violent and maybe we could make some progress.

180. Exactly! Antifa has been twisted/morphed to mean PRO-FASCIST liberal.

A classic projection technique of what they don't want to believe of themselves onto liberals and Democrats, not just the far left. They need these lies, of course, and have internalized them eagerly.

Today many of our neighbors in our ruby-red Georgia congressional district know, and no doubt some of the more educated ones just choose to claim, that fascism is an intrinsically phenomenon, instead of almost entirely very conservative. Thus, they know, when a mainstream Democrat claims to be against fascism, that that person is a sneaky, lying fascist.

"Fascism, corruption and my 'Democratic' party": This type of headline is not only all over right-wing media now but is from 1990. Lutz and othesr have been working on this for a long time. Now it's a standard Hannity and Infowars meme, so well known that there's no need to question it.

193. Antifa has been labeled

by its own actions one might surmise. During the Occupy movement we saw these elements, while in no way connected to Occupy, associated with that worthy movement casting negativity on it because they chose vandalism and destruction of property instead of demonstrating as a way of educating the public.

More recently, in Charlottesville, had these children ( and they are exactly that as well as politically naive) shunned violent responses to those churlish and unacceptable basically anti American Supremacists the story coming out of that demonstration would be markedly different.

Instead of providing our would be dictator in the White House with a means to castigate the Left, instead of reports in the media of violence on both sides, all the approbation would have been towards the protesters who chose peaceful protest and all the negativity would have been heaped upon these "deplorables".

194. Yeah. But the evolution of "Antifa" is a Frank Luntz-type creation.

But not Luntz's and far more sinister. Not that one in five conservatives knows what fascism is beyond a scary word, much less what they themselves are capable of. They just know their leaders can't be fascists because ours are. As simple as that. Needless today, very dangerous for our republic.

As far as kids behaving stupidly, yes, but that's part of the natural order. Most people who came out acted very properly, the way we would want them to. The MSM's biggest bias is toward sensationalism, so violence is 90% of what we saw.

And as far as our own far left, like gravity those will always be with us, focused on us, attacking us, undermining what we try to achieve. We are their passion, not the right. They are the left's dysfunctional cousins. And they will always give the right plenty of ammunition to try to define the rest of the left by.

Bad, but those times when the far left join the right to march together behind a bad leader are when nations are destroyed. And that specter is why this campaign of mislabeling liberals as fascists is making me so nervous.

125. +1

175. I saw less destruction of property in Charlottesville than in other protests...

several clergymen credit Antifa with protecting them and saving their lives as they stood in front of their churches locked arm in arm while the militant Nazis marched past looking for trouble. This is the type of anti-fascism we can all support.

127. All the antifa will take a swing at the Nazis ?

13. Seems to me to be an odd position to take.

"If we can prevent them from voicing their opinion, we can defeat them."

You want to fight a war of ideas, you can't win it by simply preventing the other side from airing theirs. You need to air your own and convince the undecided that yours are better. The idea of merely suppressing the opposition has pretty much never led to anything but violence and destruction. It has, to the best of my knowledge, never in and of itself silenced the opposition.

101. The antifa represent a wide range of political beliefs, all united against fascism.

104. Seattle is a liberal city and however loosely you want to associate them with other groups or not,

they are a disruptive force here (as they are in the entire PNW). They disrupted the planned peaceful labor protests at the WTO event in 1999 and brought long-planned, permitted marches to a halt, thereby changing the narrative of the entire event. They tried to disrupt the women's march (we marched by them). They caused a ruckus at a Milo Yiannopoulos event at UW and no, I don't like Milo Yiannopoulos and anything he stands for, so don't go there. The night after the election I heard about some protests at Westlake and I headed down to see if I could join it, and I quickly turned back because the mood was ugly and looked as if it could turn violent at any moment, and yes, it had a heavy Antifa turnout.

I also didn't say one article defined the movement, though I think it's a good article.

I do think that in general Antifa is anti-government, and I don't ideologically line up with that.

106. Well, all I can say is that your experience with them is vastly different from mine.

108. I'm glad if you have an experience of Antifa as a peace-loving and positive force.

Perhaps they try to work harmoniously with governments in other cities. That's not been my experience in Seattle, and yes, WTO seems like a long time ago now, but I'd planned to go down and walk with the labor unions (marches were ultimately aborted) and was instead more or less trapped in the workplace. Coworkers got caught in pepper spray, and I remember seeing armed snipers on top of the Four Seasons Hotel. It should not have been that way.

18. I do not support their tactics. n/t

177. Even when they are saving lives?????? You are black and white - sad

Rebecca Solnit shared David Freeman's post.
3 hrs ·

Antifascists to the rescue: "A group of Nazis advanced towards us. A band of AntiFa stepped up to defend the clergy, we asked them to step back and allow us to make our nonviolent stand. They respected our request and reluctantly backed off. We were actually surprised they complied. They said that they disagreed with our tactics but appreciated and respected us. Respect breeds respect. After perhaps a hundred Nazis broke through our line we regrouped but an even larger Nazi force started towards us. The AntiFa rushed in and broke the Nazi charge. We did not ask for them. We were prepared to be beaten. However, we all respected that they defended us in love despite our disagreement on tactics. They certainly saved 19 clergy and me from a brutal beating and likely even death. They did what the police would not do all day. They defended innocent lives. I cannot criticize them for that. I thank them."

19. They are the same black bloc/anarchists that always engage in violence

Using a new hashtag.

Seriously, most of the leadership are the same ones that have been involved in the same violent protests for decades. They have just adopted a new nane.

They may share some of our same goals, but they are not our allies. Some are radical anarchsits, some radical communists, all believe in the use of force against anyone who doesn't share their objectives.

44. That's pretty much what I thought. The destructive ones.

83. Yes, I agree with this. I remember the 1999 WTO protests in Seattle.

Prior to the event, a number of labor groups had applied for, and received, permits to stage a large, peaceful march. It was completely disrupted by a very small group of anarchists (who turn up at a lot of events in Washington and Oregon), and it led to police confrontation, teargas, kicked in storefronts, and a general violent atmosphere. No one remembers the labor unions who'd planned peaceful mass demonstrations against the IMF and WTO.

Same thing the night after the 2016 election. I heard there were protests in downtown Seattle, so when I left work I headed towards where they were. They weren't peaceful, and they really had nothing to do with the election. I felt if I mentioned my real pain about Hillary not being elected, I would have been beat up. It was tense and ugly and it pained me to think that I couldn't go and express my sadness in a peaceful way.

In contrast, the large, joyful women's march was an event I'll never forget. There were a couple of anarchists there, but the women just walked past them en masse and didn't give them the platform they crave. And the women in the pink hats made the news while the people with black ski masks did not.

112. When you brag that womens marches were nonviolent

When you brag that your protests had no arrests, I wonder what you think that says about you.

When you say that your protests were peaceful, I wonder how much credit you are taking for that.

When you take pictures with smiling cops and thank them for protecting you, I wonder, who are you marching for?

When you say that your protests were nonviolent, I wonder, how do you define violence?

Is it a brick?

Is it a rock?

Is it a baton?

Is it pepper spray?

Is it a firehose?

Is it a police dog?

Or is it poisoned water?

Is it a school suspension?

Is it mass incarceration?

Is it grinding poverty?

Is it that “random” airport security check?

Is it yet another traffic stop?

Is it the toy gun in that kid’s hand?

Is it that stop and frisk?

Or is it the thought that you could march a million white women down the street without fear — and high five the same cops who wouldn’t hesitate to pepper spray black and brown faces begging for nothing less than their lives — and then call it progress?

Critics, particularly some white people, have opted for other, less reasonable responses. The problem is, for many white people, civility is the status quo. They might oppose racism, but they feel no shame in calling out the actions of activists. Unfortunately, the status quo in many Western societies is a system that still harms people of colour. Any action for justice will, by definition, be disruptive. It is this very order, the status quo itself, which makes life difficult for people of colour – but not for most white people.

People of colour are saying: instead of society being difficult for us, let’s make it difficult for Nazis. Let’s make genocidal beliefs unwelcome. As Dr King put it, the white moderates’ call for civility in the face of injustice is a massive stumbling block. Such a person “prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.”

For some white people there’s nothing to disrupt. For the rest of us, there is.

115. I didn't actually say that, I said that they walked by people trying to disrupt the march.

And I do think the WTO event would have been a lot more effective if the huge, permitted marches had been allowed to take place.

Instead, the visual people remember is some kid kicking in the Nike store window while wearing Nike shoes (for the record, I boycott Nike).

I'm supposed to apologize for the fact that I participated in a peaceful statement march? In a city where women, by the way, are assaulted every day,? I should know, because I am one of them. I was randomly and violently attacked at a bus stop a few years ago, and I have to worry about that every time I want to leave the house alone after dark.

178. There is little comparison between the WTO event and pro-Nazi rallies...

WTO is going to draw the more anarchical, anti-capitalist protesters by it's very nature. You are making the same, false comparison that Tweety was trying to make on MSNBC yesterday, and the very same argument Trump was trying to make when he spoke to reporters on Tuesday! Even many Republicans are not falling for this and the fact that banks and large corporations are pulling out of their support for this president under protest proves that there is a much more important issue than world trade at stake here! Please understand the point of view you are endorsing. I know you must feel emotional about your experiences in Washington, be we can save that discussion for another day.

126. +1

25. One of the Nazis said it best:

"The thing about us fascists is, it’s not that we don’t believe in freedom of speech. You can say whatever you want. We’ll just throw you in an oven after." -- One of the Charlottesville Nazis, quoted by his father.

So while we wring hands about free speech, they're using that free speech while they make plans for genocide and murder. In their own words.

68. that

26. "Antifa" is undefined.

It is a label that has no established definition in the United States, really. People identify themselves as "antifa," but there are no particular descriptors of that "movement." We're all anti-fascism, whether or not we use that label.

In Europe, though, Antifa has an established identity, and it is generally connected to violence. All one has to do is Google the word and look at the Image results to understand that.

We need to be careful, I think, in the use of labels that already have a history.

29. Antifa has an established identity here too. It is an embrage of violence.

33. Yes. And that identity is negative, as seen

by the public, generally. It's a poor label for people who are trying to protest in a peaceful way. Since it is heavily connected with violence in Europe, that connection is often applied to people who label themselves with the term. That's not a good thing.

The link I provided produces almost exclusively images from Europe and depicts violent actions.

It will be essentially impossible to remove associations with the term "Antifa" from that in this country. People google stuff here, and will see what it represents elsewhere.

I don't like seeing progressive adopt labels with that sort of connotation. It's not useful.

169. They are not anti-liberals - things are not black and white as you see them

We should be grateful for antifa = clergy and protesters said antifa saved thier lives in Charlottesville.

Who are the antifa?
President Trump equated them with white supremacists. Here's why he’s wrong.

Years before the alt-right even had a name, antifascists were spending thankless hours scouring seedy message boards and researching clandestine neo-Nazi gatherings. They were tracking those who planted the seeds of the death that we all witnessed in Charlottesville. Agree or disagree with their methods, the antifa, who devote themselves to combating racism, are in no way equivalent to alt-right trolls who joke about gas chambers. Behind the masks, antifa are nurses, teachers, neighbors, and relatives of all races and genders who do not hesitate to put themselves on the line to shut down fascism by any means necessary.

58. Baader-Meinhof Group was antifa

60. American activists are sometimes to quick to accept existing labels.

It's not a plus. While individuals might know what they mean when they say "antifa," nobody else will. So, they'll Google it and find out that in Europe, where the term developed, it's synonymous with violent anarchists. Not a good choice of labels, unless you are a violent anarchist. In that case, it's perfect.

136. So antifa plow cars into people and hang people and support ... wtf are you saying here? thx

148. you also lose the moral high ground when you make broad brush statements and false equivalencies

There are almost certainly some in the broad collection of groups and individuals who might be considered antifa who personally enjoy and seek out violence and violent confrontation. It's perfectly possible and reasonable to distinguish between that approach/orientation and antifa as a whole.

As an example: a couple dozen people gathering together near, say, a synogogue or an African-American church, while carrying nazi flags and shouting nazi slogans is a show of force and a threat of violence. A couple dozen people who respond to this by forming a barrier between the nazis and the object of their attack, wearing black clothes and perhaps brandishing sticks or other makeshift weapons, is also a show of force and a threat of violence. But they are not morally equivalent actions, and to pretend that they are is to cede the moral high ground.

160. on the contrary, you clearly don't understand what Antifa is

"It is an organization that ..."

Antifa isn't "an organization" any more than "the alt-right" or "the left" (or "liberalism" or "golfers" or "bikers" ) is an organization. Rather, it is an umbrella term for a pretty wide-ranging collection of mostly unaffiliated groups who practice a variety of tactics and strategies in response to the threats posed by fascist and racist organizations. Within that collection, there are certainly some groups and individuals who seek out violence and violent confrontation.

That is clearly different from a simple willingness to not shrink from violence or confrontation when such situations develop. As in my earlier example, they recognize shows of force and threats of violence from racists and signal their refusal to let such violence go uncontested.

Edited to add: nor are antifa groups, individuals, or activities necessarily connected to violence at all. Examples of antifa action include protesting venues hosting racist speakers/performers, publicizing pictures of participants at far right rallies, and so on.

163. "direct action" does not equal "violence"

Removing racist flyers from a community bulletin board is a form of direct action. A strike is a form of direct action. A sit-in is a form of direct action. Your equation of direct action with violence is clearly a distortion.

I edited my earlier post to add the following, but I think I was too late in doing so, so I'll repeat it here: nor are antifa groups, individuals, or activities necessarily connected to violence at all. Examples of antifa action include protesting venues hosting racist speakers/performers, publicizing pictures of participants at far right rallies, and so on.

I have no problem with condemning violent extremists. But it's simply not the case that all antifa are violent or have "violence on their minds."

164. It would be naive or disingenuous to suggest Antifa's concept of "direct action"

is typified by removing flyers from a bulletin board.

Posts like this make you seem unserious. The purpose of Antifa—there reason for being—is to engage in street battles with Nazis following the same failed Antifa strategy of the 1930s that helped bring Hitler to power.

174. Again, you clearly have a pretty limited knowledge of antifa

Why would you think that erasing racist graffiti or removing racist propaganda wouldn't be a typical activity of Antifa direct action? It happens a lot.

White power/nationalist groups often recruit in poor neighborhoods. For instance, they may put up graffiti, or paper houses, or put stickers on road signs, or whatever. Antifa groups come along and remove that graffiti or cover it up. They remove white power stickers from road signs. They put up anti-racist flyers (or graffiti) of their own. It's plenty common. It's not violent.

White power/nationalist groups often recruit and organize on internet bulletin boards. Antifa groups and individuals troll the boards to disrupt. They identify users and out them as racists. It's plenty common. It's not violent.

White power/nationalist groups and individuals recruit at music and speaking venues. Antifa groups organize protests to call public attention to the agenda of the speakers and/or the willingness of the venue to provide them with a platform. It's plenty common. It's not violence.

A protest is, by its very nature, a show of force. When white power groups organize rallies to show their force in communities across America, Antifa organize counter-protests. The counter-protest, too, is by its very nature a show of force. In most cases, these competing shows of force don't result in outright violence.

184. I suspect there's a confirmation/selection bias at play here

Fine, you've recognized agent provocateurs at peaceful demonstrations, and understand them to be antifa. My whole point is that the term antifa covers a much broader range of subjects than the people that you recognize and identify as such at your local rallies. And if your criteria for identifying people as antifa is limited to those who seek out violence then, yes, your understanding of antifa will be that they're all violent agent provocateurs. But it won't be a particularly accurate picture.

"They are ideological enemies."

I get that you see them as ideologically opposed to liberalism, and I won't argue that point here. But "fundamentally violent" doesn't follow from "ideological enemies." And a willingness to make that leap without much reflection is unworthy of liberalism.

"You have no idea who you are talking to, so please cut the condescending comments."

I'm sorry if I've come across as condescending. That has not been my intent. I do feel that the argument you've presented here does not reflect being particularly well informed about antifa, but frankly that's not uncommon.

Also, I'd suggest that if you don't want other people making condescending comments, you should refrain from making condescending comments yourself.

If their actions were limited to removing propaganda posters we wouldn't be having the discussion. But that isn't the reality, and you know it.

I've never claimed their actions were limited to removing propaganda. One of us has been pushing a narrow and limited view of antifa activities, but it hasn't been me.

34. I don't know about everything they've done in the past

But for what they did in Charlottsville they get a massive thumbs up from me and I'll just say we need more like them. And I've already vowed that if the alt right comes anywhere near my community, I will be out there with them.

143. Teehee!

150. This is one of the best threads I have see. Pretty respectful on a difficult topic.

I'm trying to understand what I can about this 'group.' Seeing your experience vs Lisa M, is it, for example? Mineral Man's posts, and many others. I read that article in The Atlantic...and responses to it..etc...

The whole concept of violence and when it is or is not appropriate, necessary, is a huge question, or maybe it is not.. I fall very much on the non-violent side, whatever that REALLY means. On the other hand, what would I DO... if? In the moment something were happening....
If the 2 guys I see maybe once a month somewhere in the smallish town where I live, driving around in 2 pickups flying confederate battle flags (do they know each other).... were to one day be joined by others who may live here(I have no idea) in some rally, threatening stance, whatever it might be.. intimidating a small group of Muslim families in the local park on a Sat afternoon...also an Iranian family, dad plays zarb !!
What WOULD I do? I think I know...I hope I do...

Even HH The Dalai Lama has said about it, that there are instances when defensive violence may be necessary.

At least I have learned that for me, so far, 'antifa,' is still an undefined term, open to study...

152. It is a difficult dilemma, no doubt about it.

I guess I have been fortunate, in that I've never had a peaceful protest go sideways.

It is scary times we live in.

You are correct, as I've posted somewhere lately, Buddhist doctrine teaches that violence to prevent greater violence is acceptable. You will still need to pay a karmic debt for it, but it will be less than standing by and allowing a greater evil to take place.

I say this with the caveat of admitting I'm a bad Buddhist. I believe in the Path, but I stumble and fall most days.

64. Coventina is not trolling the forum.

Simply because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them a troll.

If that were the case, I'd think you were a troll. Because I don't agree with your view about Conventina's actions.

But you're not a troll are you? You're just a member of DU, sharing your opinion, and not suggesting other DU members are trolls, right?

Because that would be breaking the rules and you would never do that, right?

You were simply speaking in the general, right? And not directing your comments at another DU member in particular, right?

Because if you were speaking about particular posters, you'd have the courage of your convictions and would call them out by name, right?

Of course you would! If you were actually calling another DU member a troll, that is. But you're not. Because that would breaking the rules, and you would never do that. And you would never post inflammatory comments about other DU members either, would you? Of course not! That would be breaking the rules too.

51. Well, I wanna be careful here....

I applaud their willingness to put their physical well-being on the line.

I encourage them to avoid inciting violence first. I encourage them to NOT damage the private property of people not involved in the RW efforts, and I REALLY, REALLY encourage them to avoid violent confrontation with law enforcement.

139. No, MLK never advocated just be killed by terrorist. We're not supposed to INITIATE or EXACERBATE

116. Saw this on #OurResistance; non violence is cowardice?????; I disagree of course

From a comrade:

White supremacists and fascists have co-opted your liberalism. They've trained you to say things like "on both sides" and "violence is not the answer." They've left ideas like centrism and horseshoe theory on your doorsteps. They don't want you to oppose them.

They want you to stay in that comfortable middle ground, so you act as a buffer between them and their opposition. You're their bodyguards.

Stop being complacent. Stop being complicit. You don't have to go out getting in fistfights with Nazis or pepper sprayed by the cops, but for fuck's sake -- stop helping them. Denounce them.

Be vocal. Stop making apologies for them. If you can't say "no" to the damn KKK or people waving swastika flags, what are you good for? Stop feeling enlightened in your cowardice. Take a damn side.

75. They are not a "violent group -- that would be the Nazis

85. from the Atlantic article

Those responses sometimes spill blood. Since antifa is heavily composed of anarchists, its activists place little faith in the state, which they consider complicit in fascism and racism. They prefer direct action: They pressure venues to deny white supremacists space to meet. They pressure employers to fire them and landlords to evict them. And when people they deem racists and fascists manage to assemble, antifa’s partisans try to break up their gatherings, including by force.

..........................................

A similar cycle has played out at UC Berkeley. In February, masked antifascists broke store windows and hurled Molotov cocktails and rocks at police during a rally against the planned speech by Yiannopoulos. After the university canceled the speech out of what it called “concern for public safety,” white nationalists announced a “March on Berkeley” in support of “free speech.” At that rally, a 41-year-old man named Kyle Chapman, who was wearing a baseball helmet, ski goggles, shin guards, and a mask, smashed an antifa activist over the head with a wooden post. Suddenly, Trump supporters had a viral video of their own. A far-right crowdfunding site soon raised more than $80,000 for Chapman’s legal defense. (In January, the same site had offered a substantial reward for the identity of the antifascist who had punched Spencer.) A politicized fight culture is emerging, fueled by cheerleaders on both sides. As James Anderson, an editor at It’s Going Down, told Vice, “This shit is fun.”

.......................................................

Now, in the Trump era, Portland has become a bastion of antifascist militancy. Masked protesters smashed store windows during multiday demonstrations following Trump’s election. In early April, antifa activists threw smoke bombs into a “Rally for Trump and Freedom” in the Portland suburb of Vancouver, Washington. A local paper said the ensuing melee resembled a mosh pit.

70. let the trump supporters make themselves look as indefensible as possible

Let the trump supporters do all the murdering and bloodying of their opposition. There are still more of us than them, most of America still stands against bigotry and for patriotism based on ideas and not race. They are powerless so long as they cannot successfully incite us to violence. Let them do the violence. We should keep showing up to protest them, practice self-defense, and record their violence whenever possible.

89. "kumbaya" !

100. I'm not saying there's never a time to fight with violence.

I'm not sure how much the situation that lead to the rise of the Nazi party in Germany is comparable to what we have today. Perhaps you're right, but there was quite a lot of street violence in the Weimar republic especially between communists and right wing parties. To my understanding there was no clear sense of any one faction being "more in the ethical wrong" for violence than another. Whereas at the present, every time someone on our side protesting is bloodied or killed, the country, industry leaders, and even politicians and intellectuals on the right, immediately rally behind us and disavow the bigots.

We want to maintain and perpetuate that dynamic. It forces all decent people on the right to reckon with the fact that people on the political right have more of a problem than others. It does more to keep hearts and minds on our side than punching someone (outside of self-defense) even thought that might feel deserved and useful at the moment. I'm absolutely an advocate for being prepared to defend oneself, but otherwise, all things considered at present, I don't think it serves us to instigate violence against Nazis.

130. Can you elaborate on this..

"...every time someone on our side protesting is bloodied or killed, the country, industry leaders, and even politicians and intellectuals on the right, immediately rally behind us and disavow the bigots. "

Unless I am somehow misunderstanding what you mean, I have not seen this to be the case. They usually have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to say anything.

189. you might be right, but I still think whether to be aggressive with violence is a complex matter

Alt-right groups want to claim a false equivalence that counter-protesters are no better than neo-nazis, and that they are being attacked for exercising their right to free speech. They want to present themselves as more sensible and as defenders of white interests, while claiming we don't want to engage on an ideological level and don't represent the interests of whites.
If we initiate violence against them, my concern is we enable them to propagate that narrative and take attention away from their thuggish actions. For example, many right wing pundits are breathing a sigh of relief right now because of the islamic terror attack in Spain that they can use to divert attention from the horrific neo-nazi rally and Trump's support for it. And some morons might be inclined to buy that the alt-right is really standing up for free speech and that our platform does not represent the interests of white people. Unfortunately, morons also get the vote.

Alt-right groups also want more attention so they can recruit. While self-defense is always acceptable, if we initiate violence, we would have to make certain that it actually deters them. It might simply give them fodder with which to encourage their members to retaliate. The resulting cycle of violence just enables them more attention beyond what rallies buy them.

There is a time and place to be aggressive with violence (in contrast to self-defense, which is always acceptable). But at this stage in the evolution of the alt-right, I'm just not sure that aggression helps us more than it does them. On the other hand, if the nazis were going to commit violence anyway after their rally, then I guess it's good that antifa at least shut it down before they had any speakers.

In any case, rather than simply attacking them IRL, why don't we counter them online? That's where their efforts to sell their platform and to recruit begin. They organize to use message boards, social media, and comments sections everywhere to propagandize. Why don't we make ourselves a significant presence on 4chan and wherever else we can effectively present an attractive counter-narrative?

97. They are too militant from what I've seen. We should not get caught up in that.

105. At the anti-racism march in Minneapolis last night

Edit I should preface this by admitting my ignorance regarding groups like antifa, black blok and all that. I just know that these guys carried the antifa flag and wore the balck and masks.

There were a few antifa there (or at least they seemed to claim they were). They were masked, dressed in black and all that. BUT I had gotten the sense that these guys weren't hardened people ready to do any sort of battle so much as do what I felt was a few stupid and dangerous tricks. At the march someone had on woode 1"x1" boards some khaki pants and a white shirt and nazi symbols markered on it. Like a nazi dummy. Anyway we ended the march at city hall and the dummy was stuck into the ground in some bushes. At some point the antifa guys thought it would be a good idea to light the thing on fire. Which, to me was just pointlessly stupid because obviously there was going to be destruction of property.... The really stupid thing about it is that once the clothes were burned from the scaffold holding them up what was left was..... wait for it........ wait for it...... A burning cross. /Facepalm.

I am all for defending when physical violence presents itself. But I do not think that masking yourself is the right approach. And there were more than a few people that let these guys know that. Maybe I have a different perspective being a white male. But I think part of the strength in this is showing that we aren't afraid to show who we are and what we are and that we are here to stand up for people. But then there is the risk of putting yourself into situations that you might not be able to get yourself out of. Like unfair legal battles that you can't possibly defend yourself against. Or being easily identifiable and having someone follow you home and take out their angst against your family or friends. Still, I think donning the black masks is similar too much to the other side wearing the hoods. When you have your face out there to be known you are more accountable in your actions. If your actions are justified then hopefully you will be vindicated. Then again I'm a white mail. My experience and privilege is a lot different than others. So for me.... I don't wear masks. Besides I think it is important for it to be known that I got their backs.

Fascists are on the offensive on many fronts. Antifa mobilizes to confront and defend against fascists when they literally attempt to advance.

I do not have to agree with every action taken by every individual who associates with Antifa in order to appreciate the fundamental difference between antifa's motivation, goals and tactics and those of the fascists.

145. They are heroes defending this nation - for which we should all be very grateful!

Very brave, mostly young people. The more I watched that grizzly scene in Charlottesville, the more I felt like we should have all been out there with them. The U.S. troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan are undoubtedly brave - but for no fault of their own - they are not presently defending this country. They are being used in an offensive manner rather than defensive. Antifa - or whatever name you want to give the fascist resistors/fighters - they are our last line of defense (or perhaps first) against a fascist wave actually taking control of this country - just as it did in Germany and Italy in the 30's.

146. They provide a conduit for Agents Provacateurs. Even if they are sincere in their anti-fascist

beliefs, if they favor violent tactics of any sort, they simply make it easier for {russian} agents to commit egregious acts. Then, the actual fascists get to point to the anti-fascists and say "see? they're violent too, no difference, cue the riot police"

154. I am soooooo glad

they are here. I don't care that they had weapons, non bullet shooting, unlike the so-called white supremacist militias at the charlottsville killings who carried AUTOMATIC WEAPONS....antifa members have the right to protest and meet violence with violence if necessary. I shudder if the exact same scenario would have played out with just BLM members standing against the racist right....would have been a fucking massacre and the goddamn protectors in blue, would have stood back and laughed....glad Antifa is here and active.

161. Trolling for a race war: Neo-Nazis are trying to bait leftist antifa activists into violence and

I have also been noticing a LOT on the right using Antifa as a talking point about Charlottesville. The gist of their argument is that much of the violence was provoked by Antifa.

I know this is bullcrap. But it fits right into Trump's "both sides" meme.....somehow Antifa (and BLM added for good measure) is to blame for what the Nazis and KKK were doing.

The article I found shows that people of the right have actually been trying to infiltrate into Antifa, goading them into being violent....so that the fascists look like victims, and thus get more support. This is a concerted effort on their part to goad the left into violence.

Please, folks, this is serious. What happened at Charlottesville would have been a disaster if there was so much Antifia violence that the public would perceive that these rightists are the victims. That may be what they are counting on!

Going forward, we must remember that we should not get "played" by the Nazis and other hate groups. Martin Luther King Jr was right...nonviolence is the answer.

It scares me what I read. I hadn't heard of Antifa before. Nothing should be allowed to distract the public from the fact that the Nazis, KKK and the alt-right are the villians.